|
|
June 20, 2013
|
|
Coming Apart at the SeamsPosted on Sep 14, 2007WASHINGTON—Gen. David Petraeus likes to describe the Iraq he envisions as a patchwork quilt. You establish security in a neighborhood over here, bring peace to a village over there, create more and more of these scraps of relative tranquility—and then stitch the heterogeneous pieces together. The problem is with the seams. They have a tendency to unravel. On Thursday, while Petraeus was still in Washington delivering his optimistic progress report, the biggest success he has been touting all week—the decision by Sunni tribal leaders in formerly hostile Anbar province to switch sides and cooperate with the Americans—was ominously threatened. A roadside bomb in Ramadi killed Abdul-Sattar Abu Risha, the most prominent of the newly cooperative sheiks, calling into question the “political shift of seismic proportions” that Petraeus has advertised. The general was confident that the assassination would not send Anbar back into chaos—that, on the contrary, it would strengthen the resolve of the tribal leaders. Earlier this year, before the “surge” of additional American troops began, the sheiks decided that the best way to rid the province of an increasingly oppressive al-Qaida presence was to work with U.S. occupation forces. “I think that the tribes will pull together and go after whoever did this,” Petraeus said in an interview with reporters and editors of The Washington Post. But he also acknowledged Abu Risha’s leadership among the sheiks and called his death “a tragic loss ... a terrible loss for Anbar province and all of Iraq.” Advertisement “I think that both Gen. Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker are capable people who have been given an impossible assignment,” Sen. Barack Obama said Thursday in a telephone interview. “George Bush has given a mission to Gen. Petraeus, and he has done his best to try to figure out how to put lipstick on a pig.” Having attended sessions with both Petraeus and Crocker this week, I tend to agree. These aren’t a couple of yahoos on some wild-eyed ideological mission. They are skilled, knowledgeable professionals who understand that their first job is to avoid doing things that would make the situation in Iraq worse than it already is. If you take as a given that there will be well over 100,000 U.S. troops in Iraq through the end of the Bush administration—and that’s Bush’s unwise decision, not the general’s or the ambassador’s—then creating pockets of stability, and trying to sustain and enlarge them, seems like a reasonable use of those forces. There’s a disconnect, though. The patchwork strategy that Petraeus and Crocker describe is necessarily slow and painstaking; it requires time for old wounds to heal and enmities to fade. But most of the surge troops that Petraeus is deploying in Anbar and around Baghdad will have to be withdrawn by next summer—not because of anything Bush might decide, but because the Army and the Marine Corps are running out of available forces. And it’s clear that while Republicans in Congress might not be ready yet to force the president to end his Iraq adventure, there is no support for keeping anything like current troop levels in Iraq for, say, a decade or two, to give the Iraqis time to decide if they want to become a nation again. “This is an ethno-sectarian competition for power and resources,” Petraeus said this week. He described the U.S. role as trying to ensure that Iraqis conduct that competition via politics rather than force of arms. As a soldier, it’s not his job to make U.S. foreign policy; that responsibility, alas, falls to Bush. Petraeus has been handed a bushel of lemons and is trying his best to make something akin to lemonade. Both he and Crocker said they believe the United States can do considerable good in Iraq. Both men said they believed there were important U.S. national security interests that could be protected there. We heard both men speak optimistically about “success” in Iraq, but they were careful to leave the definition of success open to interpretation. From neither man did we hear any chest-thumping, saber-rattling, or thundering promises of “victory.” That’s because it’s the Iraqis’ war. We’re just in the middle of it. Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com. © 2007, Washington Post Writers Group New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy. |
By Conservative Yankee, September 18, 2007 at 5:58 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
100981 by cyrena on 9/17 at 7:12 pm
Your rant still did not link Bush to the Rockefellers which was Mr. Billis original contention. I seriously doubt there is much I can learn from either of you about the oil business, but please prove me wrong. I’m familiar with Carlyle.
Report thisBy cyrena, September 17, 2007 at 8:12 pm Link to this comment
#100552 by Conservative Yankee
Dear Conservative Yankee,
I think you missed a region, and maybe a big fat chapter out of the Bush Dynasty playbook. You’re familar with the Carlyle Group, right? If not, check them out. And, you know about the long ago marriage between the House of Saud and the House of Bush, right?
And, you DO get that Houston, Tx has long been the Bush Capitol of the US, even when The Boy was screwing up oil deals in West Texas, back in the 80’s, right?
And, shouldn’t we pay attention to the fact that the side deals involve oil companys, (like HUNT, which has been a HUGE name in Texas oil for decades upon decades) all have connections to the bush-cheney clan.
How about some of their other friends, like Condi, who has that big ass OIL TANKER sitting just there off of our own gulf coast, (with all of the others) with her named spelled in those gigantic block letters. (can’t miss it if you’re in the area). Her daddy set that all up before he died, just like he did with that nice little pot of shares in Chevron, and a seat on it’s executive board.
So, once you look back over all of that stuff, (in case you missed it) you’ll realize that Thomas Billis is right, the Boy never met an oil company he didn’t like, (except for maybe the ones that he tried to operate and failed). (you should check his record in Midland and Odessa Tx. It was REALLY bad).
But, he didn’t fret long over even that, since Pops was always able to fix the stuff.
So, the Boy is still doing what he’s always done best…pep-rally cheerleader for any company or individual who bathes in the same perfume he does..oil. That’s his job. The only one he’s ever really been able to do, because he’s retarded.
They say we all have a purpose in life, and we just have to find it.
Have you read ‘America’s Kingdom’ (The first one - Saudi Arabia). There are some Shurb Family links there, and it’s really interesting. It’s by Robert Vitalis, and well worth the read. All about Aramco that you mentioned to Thomas Billis.
And, at least the Elder Shrubs like that oil company just fine. Cheney too. Matter of fact, I bet Cheney gets along with the Saudi Royals better than anybody else.
And after all, it IS cheney calling the shots. That’s why it pretty much doesn’t even matter whether the Boy likes ‘em or not. (but, he does).
Report thisBy riya, September 17, 2007 at 12:08 am Link to this comment
I think it in was a Joni Mithchell song.
“Seams fall apart, the center will not hold.”
Exactly what they planned for us and all.
It will hold for them, for a while, the guys that are stealing the oil, the pirates that used our own military to kill and die for their profits. The guys, meaning, our own President and his charming entourage…
What a shame, we’re literally paying tax dollars to bolster the oil companies, and the likes of Blackwater. Getting paid thrice as much as our paid military, with no legal holds attached. Murder at will, no consequences.. We’re paying for corporations to profit. We’re not paying for any war at all, because there isn’t one. It’s just a massive heist of resources. Citizens shouldn’t be paying tax dollars to villanous private corporations, should we?
Have we really become a Fascist regime? Lookin’ like it to me.
Report thisBy Conservative Yankee, September 16, 2007 at 6:04 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
100629 by thomas billis on 9/15 at 2:32 pm
“Bush has never met an oil company he did not like.”
My point was that your contention was based on misinformation. your new post contains more of the same.
Bush also owned a MLB team. do you suppose there are other teams he dose not like?
It is easier to post opinion based on nothing then to get necessary information, but if you happen to be the type of person interested in truth, I have several good books which may interest you.
Barbarians at the Gates; tells of the merger-madness of unbridled capitalism in the 80’s. it has several good pages about a man named Raleigh Warner Jr.
The History of the Standard Oil Company; a non complimentary review of how John D. Rockefeller cobbled together the company, resources, and people who made up the richest corporate entity ever(counted in today’s dollars)
The Life of John D. Rockefeller; which includes his battle with interloper Texas Oil Company (known today as Texaco)
The three of these books together tell how regional corporate entities attempted to enrich themselves through the subversion of our constitution, the enslavement of peoples around the world, and the toppling of governments. Our system (US capitalism) provided a warm bed which nurtured and encouraged these entities. If you believe Bush and his family is the problem, you need more information. Bush and his presidency are symptoms of a far reaching disease.
Report thisBy thomas billis, September 15, 2007 at 3:32 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
To conservative yankee.My point was to pick the largest oil company that our army is representing in Iraq.Not per se Exxon Mobil.Pick the oil company you like and substitute it.Bush has never met an oil company he did not like.
Report thisBy Conservative Yankee, September 15, 2007 at 5:39 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
100521 by THOMAS BILLIS on 9/14 at 9:31 pm
“Surpise surprise American oil men are moving into Iraq and cutting oil deals.With the protection of Bushs exxon mobil rangers.”
This is a false and intentionally inflammatory statement, most likely born out of ignorance. Find me one single link between the Bush family and Exxon Mobil. ADDITIONALLY show me any information where the Rockefeller’s cozied up with Bushes…. They hate each-other! To get the full poop, read up on; Standard Oil and it’s early competitors. You’ll find that the North-East oil companies (Standard of New York + Mobil, Standard of New Jersey = EXXON) have a long and acrimonious relationship with the Texas wildcatters (where the Bush family was involved)
Yes we are in Iraq for the oil, and yes ExxonMobil will be involved with marketing that oil (although it will probably flow through Aramco first) BUT Bush didn’t go to Iraq for the Rockefellers… He went for himself.
AND, like the drug problem, US citizens get it backwards continually! It is the CONSUMER who drives the endless conflict for the resource, not the supplier. Without the CONSUMER, there is no market!
Report thisWant a entity to vilify in this mix? Look in the mirror!
By THOMAS BILLIS, September 14, 2007 at 10:31 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Surpise surprise American oil men are moving into Iraq and cutting oil deals.With the protection of Bush’s exxon mobil rangers this should just work out fine.When the American people catch on to the blood for oil plan of this administration Petraeus Betrayus will be the nicest of terms used to describe the only General left willing to be a lackey for a failed policy.
Report thisAny chance the hapless democrats will call Iraqi’s to testify before congress and hear what they think about is going on in their country.How about bringing some of those 70% who want us to leave and tell us why?Maybe a couple of the two million who have left Bush’s paradise in Iraq for other places.
They kill Americans and then they kill Al Qaida and who knows maybe Americans again.These are our friends in Iraq.With friends like these who needs enemies?
By cyrena, September 14, 2007 at 10:16 pm Link to this comment
Well, at least you guys all get whats happening. Rolf (100367) and Felicity (100389) both hit it squarely. At least our assumptions (from the beginning) have proved out. We long ago figured out that the Catastrophe of Iraq was a planned one, and that the agenda/goal/mission/purpose/etc was to control the vast oil resources of the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, so far representing the biggest pot of it, has long ago been co-opted. The House of Saud and the House of Bush have long been intermarried by way of oil.
So, heres Iraq, with the second biggest pot, and Saddam was keeping them from it. Now hes dead, and Iraq has been turned into the US Capitol of the Middle East headquarters The Green Zone in Baghdad.
Those 4 huge military bases are indeed very permanent, because they were intended to be. And, the Emerald City in Baghdad is just as permanent. It was always intended to be. Malls, apartments, movie theaters, ice skating rinks, golf courses, and a nice little shuttle transportation system, all self-contained with its own water/power/sewage system. An enclosed Kingdom, with all the comforts of home, including chicken fried steak and grits, with southern biscuits smothered in country gravy just like the employee cafeterias at Halliburton and Exxon-Mobile.
And lets not forget the prisons either. Saddam had a couple, but weve since remodeled those, and added two new ones. Also very permanent. So are those concrete walls topped with razor wire, that have been constructed to enclose/imprison entire neighborhoods of Iraqis in there own homeland.
And, the U.S. Flags fly high at each and every one of these permanent locations in Iraq. And the oil theft continues, because that was the whole point to begin with.
Im sure that the General knew that we couldnt sustain a military presence indefinitely, but theyve been getting away with it so far, because their own main agenda has been served by the equal numbers of private contractors. We can expect more of them to fill the places of the troops, because thats the only agenda thats being served anyway. Security is limited to protecting the oil workers and their supplies. They dont care about any other security. Thats just the way it is.
No doubt the Hunt Gang (long established thugs in Dallas) has their own security, just like the others. They arent worried about anything other than getting that oil, and they have no problems with supplying their own security to make that possible.
So yes, all is going as planned. I would only argue that its slightly behind Cheneys schedule. He planned for this to already be a done deal, for ALL of the oil. Not just what the Kurds are willing to do, because the Kurds have been on Cheneys side of the oil agenda from the beginning. And, theyve been cutting deals since the beginning. This one with Hunt is only the latest.
Report thisBy DennisD, September 14, 2007 at 7:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Absolutely right, it was always about the oil and the control of it. And Bu$h family connections being first to feed at the trough should surprise no one. Will this story be mentioned on any of the so called liberal mainstream media shows. I doubt it because those same oil interests control all.
Report thisBy boggs, September 14, 2007 at 6:24 pm Link to this comment
If anyone watched the Oberman show tonight, then you heard about the “HUNT OIL CONNECTION.”
Seems that Bush’s longtime friend and contributor the Mr. Hunt from Texas, Hunt Oil, now has a contract with the Kurds to do their oil exploring for them.
SO NOW WE KNOW, IT’S AMERICAN BLOOD FOR HUNT OIL.
Report thisBy HCohen, September 14, 2007 at 2:16 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Petraeus is skilled, knowledgeable professional and a proven failure.
He was incharge of the US central strategy in Iraq between 2003 and 2006 - training the Iraqi Military, so “we can stand down”. This strategy was a complete failure. Petraeus kept on saying its working. he is a proven failure and a liar. I heard the beltway pundits praising him but they never fought under his command.
Report thisBy Jimnp72, September 14, 2007 at 12:59 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
“There would be terrible suffering if we left?”
Report thisWhat is there now, a carnival going on there? Large urban areas have been devastated, people going hungry and thirsty, no jobs, no hope, and periodic bomb blasts to keep them alert. Not much in the way of public safety or basic sanitation, either. Some progress.
By felicity, September 14, 2007 at 10:45 am Link to this comment
I continue to believe that Iraq today is exactly what it was intended to be from the beginning. The national and international merchants of death are realizing obscene profits: The Chalabi clones in the Iraqi government are depositing billions in their private accounts: Oil revenues are securely in foreign hands: Israel can wipe Iraq off its slate of potential enemies: The ‘justification’ for attacking Iran is coming to fruition: Domestically, the so-called ‘goodies,’ - Cheney’s word - like funds for education and health care are non-existent. And what finally benefits from all this? The Republican Party.
With enough money - courtesy of those who have been enriched by this war - (no matter how many black marks the Party may have) the Republican machine can pull off a win next year and, if Rove is to be believed, for many, many years to come.
Report thisBy Rolf Bremer, September 14, 2007 at 8:03 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Why very few people ask why the US has build four big PERMANENT military bases in Iraq, right after the invasion?
Report thisThey are the real proof that it’s all about a broad geopolitical plan that never had anything to do with the War on Terror, WMDs or freedom for the Iraqi people !
By Conservative Yankee, September 14, 2007 at 6:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
My favorite line is “There would be unimaginable suffering if we left Iraq.”\
Someone should point out that within families, it is unimagined suffering to lose a father, son, mother or daughter…our troops.
End this farce NOW!!!! or face the consequences.
Report this